tv [untitled] December 18, 2011 5:31am-6:01am PST
all the other departments and agencies we affect are doing their budgets in february and march. if we don't come to them until march, their response will be, great, but we can't do it this year. so if we don't do it early enough for their budget deliberations, the push-back will be "harper's harsher. those are the reasons for doing it now and not later. >> if i may. and i'm glad that we're talking about this now because i'm actually -- have some familiarity with negotiations with the city and the budgeting and i believe that supervisor campos earlier decided intentionally to touch on this issue to kind of give us a signal that the elected officials understood our desire to move this thing forward.
i also heard earlier today that we've built -- correct me, todd, if i'm wrong -- we've built in at least, you know, on paper, that the furlough days which have been negotiated citywide, we would be able to withstand negotiating back to pre-2009, i think it is. whether that's going to happen or not remains to be seen. am i right about that? so i think i'm certainly prepared to move forward along the lines of what david said, you know. sure, it could absolutely be more, faster, right but i think the sooner we get it done, the more quickly we're able to move forward just in terms of this two-year budget, and i think it's -- i think, you know, we could fight. we could certainly fight for more, but i think mr. brooks
raised a good point and i think it's important to recognize that staff has had an awful lot of success, the general manager, todd, and your staff, at persuading the other departments and the elected officials that this is something that we needed to do because of all the other things people want us to continue doing so i think, you know, there's a price. we may not have, you know, exactly, you know, what we really need but to not fight this year and to move forward and to try to address some of those things, i think it's a good course of conduct for us. i'm prepared to move there and have some confidence that, you know, we'll get the support that we need. >> thank you. it does strike me that -- this
is -- these are rates and we are still able to do anything that's cost effective to do. so that if we have programs that achieve conservation in city departments, if we have a place to sell that power once we conserve it and if that pencils out even during the four years we could do things that right now we haven't figured out how to finance but if it becomes financeable, we could do that. >> i would be very comfortable comfortable -- some of the best advice i think is not to let the perfect get in the way of the good and i think this is probably one of those circumstances. i do think it would be important for us to put in continuing rate increases into our financial planning documents so that the city family knows that this doesn't get us where we need to go and we can expect this to continue and it's a gradual rate
to reduce pain but that gradual rate will have to continue for some time and that's not a part of this motion, but i think just from a financial planning standpoint as far as informing people of our intent, i think that would be an appropriate thing to do. >> just on the timing, i would love for there to be stronger language at a minimum in this resolution. even if we committed to the actual numbers that said that we are really working towards cost of recovery, that we, you know, don't like that we have cut a lot of the service based programs that we provide. i wouldn't mind calling it conservation at a minimum but, you know, even if we just said that there are these programs that we've had to cut and then even some language around, you know, a plan to identify, if possible, alternative sources of revenue or funding as part of the p.e.c.'s contribution to
better inform in four years what the number should really look like. and i don't know if we can -- if we have the time to sort of do that or if we could draft -- just strengthen up this resolution. i would just feel more comfortable and maybe we're ready, but i feel like there's a lot of stuff that came up and it's such a significant step and maybe even acknowledging that there's -- that this half cent feels like it's palatable or however we want to put it in there. >> i think your expression of that is very clear and i'm wondering if it would be appropriate -- i was just looking at the resolution and it's -- it is a fairly comprehensive document. there's a whole lot of stuff in there and if we could leave it to staff to craft somewhere to capture that. >> or the other suggestion i might have because i was trying to figure out how much you can put in a rate thing, we could do a transmittal letter that would
come from the president of the commission or all of you or whatever to the board and that transmittal letter thank, and express concern, and that can be as detailed and collective as we would like it to be done over the next week or two. >> actually, that would probably have more impact. >> when it's in the 15th "whereas," i'm not sure it catches. >> no, i would feel more comfortable with that. >> is that something that the commissioner would like for there to be five signatures on? or just for expediency that i would sign? >> so the difference is, passing this resolution or sending a transmittal letter? >> no, no, pass this in any case. >> so you're talking about two documents. >> right. >> and a cover letter of love. >> and one signature versus five, is that just how impressive you are as opposed to how impressive i am.
>> precisely. the price of leadership rests in your hands. >> yeah, i would like to sign it. >> you'd like to sign it? >> yeah, i would. >> if you do, i'd like to sign it. >> we'll figure out how to do that without a having a sunshine act problem. >> ok. that sounds right to me. does that get us to a place where a motion is in order? i see mr. pillpull standing there. >> a bit of suggestion. if you take a transmittal letter and to the extent that you're infusing it with all the stuff we want to infuse it with, if you bring back a policy item to the commission next month, in four weeks or six weeks, to codify that as commission policy, that would further strengthen your resolve going forward so i think doing both is a good idea, have a cover letter
and then bring it back as a policy intention. that's my suggestion. >> thank you. >> i like it. commissioners, city attorney's office, maybe if we just add the direction to do the transmittal letter to the end of the resolution, that will take care of that, brown act, in directing the president of the commission to prepare a transmittal letter for the signature of the commission, then we will have done that in a public meeting. is that ok? >> move to amend. >> second. >> second. any discussion on the amendment? >> so, does that mean -- the resolution and the letter are going to come back before the commission at the next meeting? >> no. the resolution will direct staff to write a letter that we will all sign as transmittal of the resolution to the board. >> something else to do over the holidays. >> i think i had a motion. >> i have a question. >> did i have a second?
second, i'm sorry. and we didn't have any discussion. do we want discussion? we're ready for a vote. all those in favor? >> i'm sorry, i was writing. >> the last whereas to -- >> no, that's on -- that was on the addition of the final resolve. now we have to suspend rules for a technical but not important reason that doreen would be glad to tell us about if we wanted to but we need to suspend the rules and vote. >> actually, commissioners, in the notice for this, it's described there that there's a rule that references a noticing provision that's been superseded by other administrative co-provisions so we're asking you to suspend that rule and it notes that newspaper and web notice was published according to the current procedures.
>> so, we need a motion to suspend the rules. >> to suspend rule number 10. >> rule number 10. not all the rules. i have a motion, i'm sorry. >> second. >> and a second. any discussion? all those in favor. opposed? that carries. now we are clear to vote on the item as amended. do i have a motion? >> move it. >> second. >> and a second. any discussion? any public comment? all those in favor? opposed, none. the motion carries. thank you, folks. >> commissioners, the next item would be the close session item. if you could allow me to briefly read through them and if the president could entertain a motion to invoke the
attorney-client privilege. 24, consultation with agency chief security. 25, conference of legal council existing litigation of defendant. item 26, existing litigation of defendant. item 27, public employee performance evaluation, commission secretary, item 28, conference with legal counsel, existing litigation as defendant santa san mateo -- >> is there any public comment on matters to be discussed during closed session? >> david pillpo, wanted to take a brief opportunity with reference to item 27 to say what a wonderful job your committee secretary does. mike is an unheralded champion of all kinds of great things. i wanted to call that out, too. >> thank you very much. >> thank you for your time. >> any other public comment on the closed session? if not, a motion would be in order whether to assert the
attorney-client privilege. >> so moved to assert. >> moved to assert. and a second? >> second. >> and a second. any discussion? all those in favor, aye. opposed? that motion carries. we will now go into closed commissioner moran: we are back in open session. during closed sessions, the commission settled items 25, 26 and 28. it would now be appropriate for a motion as to whether to disclose the discussions during closed session. >> motion not to disclose. >> second. >> motion and seconded. all those in favor, aye. it passes. which takes us to other new